... not to be confused with pedants, of which we have plenty ...
"Plenty" suggests we have "enough" pedants. Is that even a meaningful statement? To those who engage in and support pedantry, there can never be "enough" pedants:
everyone should be a pedant. To those who prefer a less rigorous approach to everyday conversation, a single pedant is "too many". So how could there ever be "plenty"[1] of pedants?
[1] This should probably read "'a plenty' of pedants", although if using the pronoun construction it would work as "'plenty' of them". I imagine CRC will cite derivation to prefer one usage over the other.
[edit] Typo.
Edited by
drewk
June 27, 2006, 12:25:41 PM EDT
I don't know about that
... not to be confused with pedants, of which we have plenty ...
"Plenty" suggests we have "enough" pedants. Is that even a meaningful statement? To those who engage in and support pedantry, there can never be "enough" pedants:
everyone should be a pedant. To those who prefer a less rigorous approach to everyday conversation, a single pedant is "too many". So how could there ever be "plenty"[1] of pedants?
[1] This should probably read "'a plenty' of pedants", although if using the pronoun construction it would work as "'plenty' of them". I imaging CRC will cite derivation to prefer one usage over the other.
===
Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
I don't know about that
